The recent flourishing of a populist, anti-establishment theme in many countries’ politics has been explained as a revolt against serial failures of mainstream parties’ government. Ordinary peoples’ concerns have been brushed aside for too long, the elites have rigged economies for their own benefit and the common man is on a democratic rampage to break the system — so goes the ‘revolt’ theory.
A rigorous explanation would be more nuanced and country-specific, but there are enough grains of universal truth in the ‘common man revolt’ theory for us to take it seriously. The question is: where is this revolt taking us? History has thrown up enough revolutions to tell us they don’t all end well. This revolt is not in the big league, but it still has the potential to bring major change. Will this be for the better?
Mainstream politics deserves to be taken to task, but for what exactly? Classical liberals and anti-establishment populists have very different answers to that question. The policy agenda of anti-establishment populists — more trade protection; less foreign investment; more social security and ‘free’ health and education services; greater forced equality of outcomes; and more taxation of business and rich individuals — is anathema to classical liberals, who see the failure of government as a failure to limit itself and to let markets work.
The current revolt is dragging public policy in populist directions. It doesn’t take victory by outsiders to produce that result, as the mainstream parties themselves perceive an electoral necessity to become more populist. Where will this end? There is never going to be a counter-revolution for free markets and economic openness, but we can dare hope for a quiet return to the pre-GFC consensus that such is the best way forward, with smaller government thrown into the mix also.
This shift may come about through an unexpected improvement in the global economy and average incomes or the emergence of centre-right leaders who are better defenders and advocates of free enterprise than the current crop (think more Margaret Thatcher and less Teresa May). But sadly, it is more likely to take a practical demonstration over a long period that the populist revolt is an economic dead-end. We may be condemned to relive the dismal economics of the 1970s.
Home > Commentary > Opinion > Back to the 70’s?
Back to the 70’s?
A rigorous explanation would be more nuanced and country-specific, but there are enough grains of universal truth in the ‘common man revolt’ theory for us to take it seriously. The question is: where is this revolt taking us? History has thrown up enough revolutions to tell us they don’t all end well. This revolt is not in the big league, but it still has the potential to bring major change. Will this be for the better?
Mainstream politics deserves to be taken to task, but for what exactly? Classical liberals and anti-establishment populists have very different answers to that question. The policy agenda of anti-establishment populists — more trade protection; less foreign investment; more social security and ‘free’ health and education services; greater forced equality of outcomes; and more taxation of business and rich individuals — is anathema to classical liberals, who see the failure of government as a failure to limit itself and to let markets work.
The current revolt is dragging public policy in populist directions. It doesn’t take victory by outsiders to produce that result, as the mainstream parties themselves perceive an electoral necessity to become more populist. Where will this end? There is never going to be a counter-revolution for free markets and economic openness, but we can dare hope for a quiet return to the pre-GFC consensus that such is the best way forward, with smaller government thrown into the mix also.
This shift may come about through an unexpected improvement in the global economy and average incomes or the emergence of centre-right leaders who are better defenders and advocates of free enterprise than the current crop (think more Margaret Thatcher and less Teresa May). But sadly, it is more likely to take a practical demonstration over a long period that the populist revolt is an economic dead-end. We may be condemned to relive the dismal economics of the 1970s.
• Subscribe
Subscribe now and stay in the loop with our giving appeals, event alerts, newsletters and research updates.
We are always pleased to hear from you. If you have any questions or feedback, please contact us here: